On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 10:29:58AM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote: > Sean 'Shaleh' Perry <shalehperry@attbi.com> writes: > > The author can not take away ant rights that were granted. Of > > course this is my interpretation of comments made here and > > elsewhere. Anyone else care to weigh in? > IANAL but this has been discussed extensively in for example Slashdot, > and the current theory of licensing in the US and probably in EU as > well is that a non-profit license can be revoked. It would mean that > the copies in existence would stay legal but you couldn't distribute > them any longer. The key here is that if the licensee compensates the > licenser in any way, then the license can not be revoked, but if no > compensation is made, then the license may be revoked by the licenser > at will. So the solution is to make sure the copyright holder of any works you're using/distributing is already beholden to you because their work is a derived work of your own GPL code. ;) -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpIiImK7j5vb.pgp
Description: PGP signature